Lady Bug

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Lady Bug

  • Rank

Profile Fields

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hi all, I have a question about language with regard to discovery (Specifically, I'm working on the Defendants first request for the production of documents) in California. Specifically, CCP §2031.030 (a)(1) reads as follows: "a party demanding inspection, copying, testing, or sampling shall number each set of demands consecutively." why do they use the word "set."? Maybe you only have one demand (not a set), so I'm confused? More confusion: CCP §2031.030 (b) reads as follows: "in the first paragraph immediately below the title of the case, there shall appear the identity of the demanding party, the set number, and the identity of the responding party." again, I'm confused by set number? And why would that go in a paragraph identifying the demanding and responding parties to a discovery request? Do they mean to put forth the number of discovery topics you are about to list? Thank you in advance for your answer!
  2. Hi all, with regard to my case, I noticed that the bill of sale does not mention my name or the account number for the alleged credit card debt? There are two black rectangular boxes which have blocked out some information. Furthermore, Comenity Bank is not the original credit card company, as stated in the complaint. (See Below document) Here's my question: in my "first request for production of documents" should I specifically ask for the non-redacted bill of sale and documents from the real original credit card company? I also noticed that the "affidavit of sale by original creditor," has some problems (See below document): #1 it was signed by the president of committee the bank in Utah (I'm in California). So I'm wondering how she is going to be available for subpoena service within 150 miles of my city in California? It seems like a major problem with their case to me. Am I wrong? #2) the affidavit of sale states "[the] SELLER sold (or caused to be sold) a pool of charged-off accounts to Midland funding...." Again, I don't see my name or account number anywhere in this document. So how do I know that my account was included in this pool? It seems like another major problem with this case to me. Am I wrong? #3) with regard to #2), should I specifically request proof that my account number was included in this pool of charge-often accounts? Or should I bring that up at at trial? I think ASTmedic didn't want to tip his hand and didn't ask for specific things like this. Just wondering what the discovery thoughts are. Thanks so much in advance!
  3. Thanks, that makes me feel better. Did you just wait until they sent you the request or did you send a request to them before hand?
  4. Hi all, I finally received papers from the court and a trial is set for January. I'm a little confused as to how to proceed because M*dland has not started the discovery process yet. In fact, I haven't heard anything from them since they denied my Bill of Particulars last winter. The corresponding address is still their headquarters in San Diego and the same attorney I've been dealing with is still listed as the corresponding Attorney, so they haven't assigned the case to anybody local just yet. So my question is how do I proceed? Should I start the discovery process myself and if so, can I just use the discovery document that ASTmedic has generously given us on his thread? Thanks in advance!
  5. Okay, great. I'll definitely give me a call. Thanks so much!
  6. Whoops, Chowdhury is, unfortunately, in Anaheim, which is about 6 hours (drive) south of San Jose. Need someone in San Jose (70 miles south of San Francisco). Any other ideas?
  7. thanks so much for the quick reply. I really appreciate that!
  8. Hi, Does anyone know a good attorney in the San Jose, CA area? Thinking about letting a pro handle my case. Fight is with Midland. Thanks in advance! LadyBug
  9. I understand. <<<Let plaintiff object>>>. Does that mean I should file it anyway and then let them object?
  10. Thank you for your quick reply! You're awesome! What is the "OC?" Where you given me a link to that? How can you tell he is PRO JDB? I think your message got cut off, because it only said "the judge you mentioned may be the one and only...." That's all I got. Thanks again for all your help!
  11. I apologize (this is my last chance to work on this before I found my answer). I would like to attach a few alternative defenses to my answer. I'm scared that if I don't raise them in the answer, I may lose the right raise them at a later date. #1) their first written communication with me looks to be full of violations in accord with 1788.52(d). QUESTION: which alternative defense would this come under? #2) because my identity has been stolen (I have proof of this), I would like to leave that open as a defense. QUESTION: which alternative defense would this come under? #3) understand that CCP section 98 is our best friend. Is there any alternative defense I need to raise which would help support that defense? And finally, when in this process do I file for further information under CCP 96? This looks like pretty powerful stuff, but it has to be served between 45 and 30 days "prior to the date first set for trial...." I don't even have a trial date yet, so will I have time to file this, or should I just file it with the answer (to the court, POS to applicant) and request for Bill of Particulars (POS to the applicant)? Thank you again so very much and sorry for the bombardment of questions!
  12. I'm sorry, one more question: I'm going to start working on my demand for a Bill of Particulars, and just read online that a Bill of Particulars is only available for actions that are on "an account." The first page of the complaint states that, under "complaint for:" "(1) account stated." There are 31 paragraphs listed under that. And that is it. Under "on the first cause of action:" there are three paragraphs: unpaid balance, costs of suit, and "such other relief as the court may deem just and proper." And that is the end of the complaint. Next come the exhibits. QUESTION: so may I assume that this action is based on the "an account" principle, which entitles me to send the attorneys a Bill of Particulars? Thanks again!
  13. I think I may have answered my own question. I googled him and says that he is a nonpartisan judge of the superior court of Santa Clara California and won [the] election outright in the primary on June 5, 2018. So I would think he is a "real judge," but doesn't have much experience. Am I reading this correctly? Thanks again!
  14. Hi again, I have one more question. I noticed that the judge assigned to this case is called a "case management judge." Is that a "real" judge? I read in this form that it's probably best to have your case heard by a real judge and that I could make a motion for this to happen. Anybody have any idea on this?
  15. COULD THIS COMPLAINT BE CERTIFIED? Although I've read that these JDB complaints are virtually never certified, after reading through this 40 page document, I did discover this document attached: CERTIFICATE OF CONFORMITY STATE OF UTAH CITY OF SALT LAKE the undersigned does hereby certify that he/she is an attorney-at-law duly admitted to practice in the state of Utah as a residence ofXXXX County of Utah; that he/she is a person duly qualified to make this certificate of conformity. That the foregoing acknowledgment by XXXXXXXX named in the foregoing instrument taken by XXXXX notary in the state of Utah conforms with the law of the state of Utah, being the state in which it was undertaken; and when executed by XXXXX in the manner indicated will qualify as a valid and effective sworn statement in such state. __________ scribbled signature, dated October 2017. Could somebody please let me know, for I know it makes a huge difference with regard to my answer. Thanks so much in advance! PS: this "certificate of conformity" came right after a notarized document which was entitled portfolio level affidavit of sale by original owner. This is the document that stated bank B "sold (or caused to be sold) a pool of charged-off accounts to Midland funding." So I guess I can't tell if this certificate of conformity applied to the sale of the debt to Midland, or to the entire complaint.